DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

SB2등급 연성베리어의 충돌지점(CIP)에 대한 연구

Study on Critical Impact Point for a SB2 Class Flexible Barrier

  • 허연희 (공주대학교 공과대학 건설환경공학과) ;
  • 김용국 (한국철도기술연구원 첨단인프라연구단TFT) ;
  • 고만기 (공주대학교 공과대학 건설환경공학과) ;
  • 김기동 (공주대학교 공과대학 건설환경공학과)
  • 투고 : 2011.12.01
  • 심사 : 2013.06.12
  • 발행 : 2013.08.16

초록

PURPOSES : The impact performance of flexible barrier system such as structural response, vehicular motion and occupant safety vary depending on the impact point. Thus, to properly evaluate the performance of a flexible barrier system, impact should be made to a point which will lead to the worst possible results. This point is called the Critical Impact Point (CIP). This paper presents the way to determine the CIP for a SB2 class flexible barrier system which is consisted of Thrie-Beam rail and circular hollow tube post of 2m span. METHODS: Barrier VII simulations were made for impact points; Case 1 at a post, Case 2 at 1/3 span downstream from a post, Case 3 at middle of the span, Case 4 at 2/3 span downstream from a post. For the structural performance (deflections), impact simulation of 8000kg-65km/h-15degree was used, and for vehicle motion and occupant safety, simulation of 1300kg-80km/h-20degree impact was made and analysed. RESULTS: Case 1 gave the largest dynamic deflection of 75.72cm and also gave the largest snag value of 44.3cm. Occupant safety and exit angle of the vehicle after the impact were not sensitive to the impact point and were all below the allowable limit. CONCLUSIONS : For the SB2 class flexible barrier system's CIP can be regarded as a post which is sufficiently away from the end of Length of Need in order to avoid the end-effect of the barrier system. It can be more economic in the long run because the normal concrete pavement material is likely to cost more due to higher probability of maintenance and repair and higher social cost due to traffic accident, etc.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Bronstard, M. E., and Michie, J. D, 1974. Recommended procedures for vehicle crash testing of highway appurtenances. NCHRP Rep. No. 153, Transportation Research Board, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
  2. Bronstard, M. E., Calcote, L.E., Ray, M. H., and Mayer, J. B., 1988. Guardrail-bridge rail transition designs. Res. Rep. No. FHWARD-86-178, Vol. 1, Southwest Res. Inst., San Antonio, Tex.
  3. Powell, G. H., 1973. BARRIER VII : A Computer Program for Evaluation of Automobile Barrier System, U.C. Berkely, California.
  4. John D. Reid., 1998. Critical Impact Point for Longitudinal Barrier.
  5. LSTC, 2007. LS-DYNA Keyword User's Manual, Livermore Software Technology Corporation, Calf.
  6. Michie, J. D., 1981. Recommended procedures for the safety performance evaluation of highway appurtenances. NCHRP Rep. No. 230, Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C.
  7. Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware, 2009. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
  8. Ross, H. E.,Jr.,Sicking, D. L., Zimmer, R. A., and Michie, J. D., 1993. Recommended procedures for the safety performance evaluation of highway features. NCHRP Rep. No. 350, Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C.
  9. Transportation Research Board, 1978. Recommended procedures for vehicle crash testing of highway appurtenances. Transportation Research Circular 191, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.